Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 12 May 1997 10:53:58 +0300 (IDT)
From:      Nadav Eiron <nadav@cs.technion.ac.il>
To:        Chuck Robey <chuckr@mat.net>
Cc:        Mr M P Searle <csubl@csv.warwick.ac.uk>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: shutdown
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.3.95-heb-2.07.970512105124.11876A-100000@csd>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.91.970512004148.263A-100000@Journey2.mat.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On Mon, 12 May 1997, Chuck Robey wrote:

> On Sun, 11 May 1997, Mr M P Searle wrote:
> 
> > > On Sun, 11 May 1997, Mr M P Searle wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Would it break anything if the X server was kept running while shutting down?
> > > > (Nothing else, just that one process. The root window is set before starting
> > > > 'halt' - and maybe set again after the 5 seconds.)
> > > > 
> > > > Michael, who has too much free time...
> > > 
> > > I think that would mean that /usr couldn't be dismounted, which would mean
> > > that you wouldn't get a clean shutdown onthe /usr filesystem, and it 
> > > would end up being fsck'ed on startup.  I have a big disk, and wouldn't 
> > > want to have to wait on that all the time.
> > 
> > No - what if the server was on it's own file system? (which wasn't ever fsck'd as
> > it has nothing but the server on it.) My guess is that I'd get a slow shutdown
> > as not all buffers could be written to disk, but the reboot would be OK. Does
> > that sound right?
> 
> Sorry for the slow answer, I just finished my OS project, and 6th cup of 
> coffee (huh? whazzat?!) ... IF the X server didn't have any files in an 
> unfinished state (which I couldn't guarantee, never having tried it) and 
> you hacked the /etc/fstab so that it didn't do the fsck, then I think you 
> would be right.  It'd be slow whenever you actually did the fsck, but not 
> normally.
> 
> On any other system, I'd think it was a real bad idea, but, hmmm, my 
> experience with FreeBSD's filesystems is so good, well, maybe you could 
> do it.  I wouldn't, but I keep FreeBSD up for weeks ata time (except 
> when my OS class forces me into DOS) so I wouldn't realize the time 
> savings that someone who turns it on and off every day would see.
> 

There's one other (potential) problem with this: /tmp. X keeps files open
on /tmp, and if tmp is MFS and can't be umounted strange things sometimes
happen. I remember reading on this list (or was it -questions) that 2.1.5
will not (sometimes) flush its buffers with a MFS /tmp mounted. I've never
seen it on newer systems, but it wasn't consistent on 2.1.5R either, so
you can never know.

> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> ----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
> Chuck Robey                 | Interests include any kind of voice or data 
> chuckr@eng.umd.edu          | communications topic, C programming, and Unix.
> 9120 Edmonston Ct #302      |
> Greenbelt, MD 20770         | I run Journey2 and picnic, both FreeBSD
> (301)220-2114              | version 3.0 current -- and great FUN!
> ----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
> 
> 
Nadav




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.3.95-heb-2.07.970512105124.11876A-100000>